• RobotToaster
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    124
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yeah, by this argument lead in the water isn’t a concern.

    • Hylactor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      112
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      You just made me mad by helping me realize that the Trump bros are going to break water by removing fluoride long before they fix water by removing lead.

      • ryannathans@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        32
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Are you sure fluoride doesn’t? It does accumulate in the soil, building up in crops. Considering fluoride exposure from all sources, many people are above upper safe limits, even from tea drinking alone

        I don’t think fluoride should be added to water as it just pollutes the environment, where 99.99% of water isn’t coming in contact with teeth

        • marcos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          37
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          It doesn’t. This is high-school chemistry.

          Fluoride only “accumulates” up to the peak concentration of the environment (no further) on places where it is removed from contact with that environment.

          You can only accumulate fluoride in the soil if you keep adding it and there is almost no rain to wash it away.

          • ryannathans@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            16
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Like how crops are irrigated with town water, and in many areas with lowering rainfall? Accumulates in fruit, vegetables, leaves too

            • marcos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              18
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              Yes, irrigation with the minimum possible amount of water is known to destroy land for millennia at this point. But sodium will be a problem way before you notice any change in fluoride.

    • Ferrous@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yup, same with PFAS and forever chemicals. Maybe I’m ignorant because I’m not a doctor, but I don’t know if this line of thinking holds water - pun not intended.

    • reptar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      30 days ago

      lead poisoning becomes evident pretty early though doesn’t it? (With respect to kids)

      I would think that the ratio of persistent exposure to unsafe level has got to be easily higher in cases like Flint than any fluoride-in-the-water usage. Just speculation on my part.

      What measures are taken to avoid screwing up the dosage, anyone know? Maybe predilute so that an oops requires multiple buckets instead of vials?